Rails - Mar 2013 - Do you ALWAYS use "bundle exec rspec spec" tests?

I''m going through Michael Hartl''s Rails tutorial, and I am
happy to report
that (as of the end of section 7) I''m able to get things working. 
(That
said, I skipped the section on automated testing, as Hartl warned that 
automated testing is the most likely part of his book to become outdated.)

There is a heavy emphasis on the "bundle exec rspec spec" tests.  I
agree
that testing is a very necessary part of development.  As I go through the 
rest of this tutorial, I will continue to test when instructed.

That said, how essential are the "bundle exec rspec spec" tests in
most
real world apps?  My reasons for possibly not using them or not using them 
as thoroughly as the tutorial does:
1.  I still feel more comfortable testing by accessing my web site in the 
browser and trying things out as if I were one of my users.
2.  Creating the tests does add to the workload.
3.  Garbage in -> garbage out: If you don''t write the proper tests,
your
results don''t matter but could cause you to needlessly obsess over 
something that actually works but you erroneously think is in error, or you 
could think something works when it doesn''t.

After I finish railstutorial.org, I will start my first Ruby on Rails web 
site, which will profile mutual funds and ETFs.  How important is it that I 
do the "bundle exec rspec spec" testing as thoroughly as the tutorial
does?

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rubyonrails-talk/-/QAY7xmnJg3EJ.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

testing is important for when you try to introduce new features down the road or
if you plan on refactoring your code.  Its nice to have test that lets you know
you didn''t break stuff.  Imagine making a change and having to check
every page in your app… not fun and time consuming.   If you are making a small
site, personal blog or something then yeah, don''t worry about it but if
you plan on having user that use your product and you plan on introducing new
feature to your project then test everything.  It only helps :)

Matt
On Mar 16, 2013, at 12:21 AM, "Jason Hsu, Android developer"
<jhsu802701@gmail.com> wrote:
> I''m going through Michael Hartl''s Rails tutorial, and I
am happy to report that (as of the end of section 7) I''m able to get
things working.  (That said, I skipped the section on automated testing, as
Hartl warned that automated testing is the most likely part of his book to
become outdated.)
> 
> There is a heavy emphasis on the "bundle exec rspec spec" tests. 
I agree that testing is a very necessary part of development.  As I go through
the rest of this tutorial, I will continue to test when instructed.
> 
> That said, how essential are the "bundle exec rspec spec" tests
in most real world apps?  My reasons for possibly not using them or not using
them as thoroughly as the tutorial does:
> 1.  I still feel more comfortable testing by accessing my web site in the
browser and trying things out as if I were one of my users.
> 2.  Creating the tests does add to the workload.
> 3.  Garbage in -> garbage out: If you don''t write the proper
tests, your results don''t matter but could cause you to needlessly
obsess over something that actually works but you erroneously think is in error,
or you could think something works when it doesn''t.
> 
> After I finish railstutorial.org, I will start my first Ruby on Rails web
site, which will profile mutual funds and ETFs.  How important is it that I do
the "bundle exec rspec spec" testing as thoroughly as the tutorial
does?
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
> To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
> To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rubyonrails-talk/-/QAY7xmnJg3EJ.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>  
>  
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

On 16 March 2013 04:21, Jason Hsu, Android developer
<jhsu802701-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
> I''m going through Michael Hartl''s Rails tutorial, and I
am happy to report
> that (as of the end of section 7) I''m able to get things working. 
(That
> said, I skipped the section on automated testing, as Hartl warned that
> automated testing is the most likely part of his book to become outdated.)
Don''t skip it.  The fact that the details may change does not alter
the fact that testing is critical.  The tutorial will give you the
basics even if the details change over the years.
>
> There is a heavy emphasis on the "bundle exec rspec spec" tests. 
I agree
> that testing is a very necessary part of development.  As I go through the
> rest of this tutorial, I will continue to test when instructed.
>
> That said, how essential are the "bundle exec rspec spec" tests
in most real
> world apps?  My reasons for possibly not using them or not using them as
> thoroughly as the tutorial does:
> 1.  I still feel more comfortable testing by accessing my web site in the
> browser and trying things out as if I were one of my users.
That is ok when your site has 5 pages.  What about when it has 100?
Are you going to manually test everything every time you make a
change.
> 2.  Creating the tests does add to the workload.
Only in the short term.  In the long term it will pay for itself.
> 3.  Garbage in -> garbage out: If you don''t write the proper
tests, your
> results don''t matter but could cause you to needlessly obsess over
something
> that actually works but you erroneously think is in error, or you could
> think something works when it doesn''t.
Obviously true.  That just means that you have to do your best to
design the tests well.
>
> After I finish railstutorial.org, I will start my first Ruby on Rails web
> site, which will profile mutual funds and ETFs.  How important is it that I
> do the "bundle exec rspec spec" testing as thoroughly as the
tutorial does?
Vitally important.  Apart from anything else it will allow you to
sleep at night being reasonably confident that the change you made to
the site today will not have messed up some other aspect of the site
that you had not considered, so you will not wake up to an inbox full
of messages from irate customers complaining.

Colin

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 4:26 AM, Colin Law
<clanlaw-gM/Ye1E23mwN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
> On 16 March 2013 04:21, Jason Hsu, Android developer
> <jhsu802701-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>> I''m going through Michael Hartl''s Rails tutorial, and
I am happy to report
>> that (as of the end of section 7) I''m able to get things
working.  (That
>> said, I skipped the section on automated testing, as Hartl warned that
>> automated testing is the most likely part of his book to become
outdated.)
>
> Don''t skip it.  The fact that the details may change does not
alter
> the fact that testing is critical.  The tutorial will give you the
> basics even if the details change over the years.
>
>>
>> There is a heavy emphasis on the "bundle exec rspec spec"
tests.  I agree
>> that testing is a very necessary part of development.  As I go through
the
>> rest of this tutorial, I will continue to test when instructed.
>>
>> That said, how essential are the "bundle exec rspec spec"
tests in most real
>> world apps?  My reasons for possibly not using them or not using them
as
>> thoroughly as the tutorial does:
>> 1.  I still feel more comfortable testing by accessing my web site in
the
>> browser and trying things out as if I were one of my users.
>
> That is ok when your site has 5 pages.  What about when it has 100?
> Are you going to manually test everything every time you make a
> change.
>
>> 2.  Creating the tests does add to the workload.
>
> Only in the short term.  In the long term it will pay for itself.
>
>> 3.  Garbage in -> garbage out: If you don''t write the
proper tests, your
>> results don''t matter but could cause you to needlessly obsess
over something
>> that actually works but you erroneously think is in error, or you could
>> think something works when it doesn''t.
>
> Obviously true.  That just means that you have to do your best to
> design the tests well.
>
>>
>> After I finish railstutorial.org, I will start my first Ruby on Rails
web
>> site, which will profile mutual funds and ETFs.  How important is it
that I
>> do the "bundle exec rspec spec" testing as thoroughly as the
tutorial does?
>
> Vitally important.  Apart from anything else it will allow you to
> sleep at night being reasonably confident that the change you made to
> the site today will not have messed up some other aspect of the site
> that you had not considered, so you will not wake up to an inbox full
> of messages from irate customers complaining.
>
> Colin
RSpec tests are really quite necessary for a couple of reasons
(there''s a lot more, but these are crucial to me)

1) They let you test the various units of your code independent of
other elements, which makes verifying them a lot easier
2) They give you a much better insight into your code when it is
failing by providing a better means of seeing which parts actually
fail.

External tests, such as driven from a web driver, are equally essential:

1) They ensure that the whole program is working together well
(integration testing)
2) They test your program from the point of view of the user

Don''t skip either, in any "real program" -- anything you plan
on using
beyond a learning exercise. Don''t skip them on your learning exercises
either, really, as it is a habit well engrained.

There are several reasons for this, but to me it involves addressing 3
questions:

1) what do you want? (the spec)
2) what will having that get you? (the problem this solves)
3) how will you know when you have it? (the tests)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.